Churchill, the Lucifer behind partition of India
**************************
(1)
While celebrating the birth of India, it is difficult to forget the delivery pain-partition of India which resulted in death of two millions. Twenty million people were purged from their aboriginal villages and towns where their forefathers lived for centuries.
Ever since, I started exploring the history of partition and deep communal divide between Hindus and Muslims, I always ended up in three possible hypothesis.
A: You meet a liberal- he will deeply anguish how British divided India by carefully crafting the feud between the two communities which lived peacefully side by side for centuries. In liberal viewpoint, it was an imperialist design to debilitate formal colonies by keeping the communal conflict alive.
B: You meet a Hindu Nationalist- he will ask you this question- can any community live in peace with the Muslims? Is there a historical precedence for peaceful coexisting of Muslims with other religious groups ? Can Muslims live among themselves peacefully ? He will surely blame the non-inclusive and tribal nature of Islam as a religion.
C: You meet an Islamist-he will raise this question- did Hindus ever embrace them as equal brother? Isn't it true in many of the Hindu households, they won't allow Muslims to enter into their house? When discrimination and hatred against Muslims is so high in a Hindu majority land, what is the solution for dignity and social progress for the Muslims if they are not given a separate nation ?
When I prowl through all of these narratives, I could clearly see iota of truth and merit in all of the arguments.
However, some truths are bigger than others. Although you may be convinced about the British political design of partition, it is difficult to substantiate their role behind the curtain in insinuating the riots following direct action day. I never got this question " factually" answered how and why British planned this partition -as on surface it may look like Muslim league's demand led to the gruesome butchery of India.
However while exploring role of Franklin D Roosevelt (FDR) in pressurizing Winston Churchill for independence of India, I came across several interesting documents which proves beyond any doubt-real Lucifer behind the partition is none other than Churchill [1]. This racist pig for whom 2.1 million Bengali died in the famine of 1943 is also the mastermind behind " Making of Jinnah" which led to death of two millions Indians and rape in unimaginable scale.
And imagine this- in 2002 poll, he has been voted out to be the greatest Briton of all the time. He also won Nobel Prize in literature in 1953 and an honorary citizen of United States in 1963 ( only eight people have been given this honor).
(2)
Before discussing the dialogues between FDR and Churchill which is perhaps the best documents available regarding Churchill's view on India and Hindu, it will be worthwhile to grasp a few aspect of Churchill's personality to understand how he pushed for the partition and why he was sympathetic to Indian Muslims and their demand for separate nation.
Winston Churchill started his career as an army officer in British India Army in 1896. He was involved in action in Anglo-Sudan war and 2nd Boer war in Africa. During first world war, he served in various capacity and in various fronts while failing in all of his assignments. Yet every time he escaped criticism back home using his powerful rhetoric and fiery speech for which he was famous as politician.
During his close association with British India army, he had close relationship with Muslims and Sikhs but for some reasons, he hated native Hindu rulers and Congress. He was quite open that he hates India and Hindu customs are bestial. On the contrary he had better opinion about Ottoman empire and its aristocracy. For him Arabs & Turks are brave while Hindu rulers are worthless coward. During his posting in Middle East, he loved to dress like rich Arab royals but perhaps he never liked Indian royal customs.
In London, his close circle included prominent Muslims - Aga Khan, Baron Headly ( President of London Muslim Society ), Waris Ali ( A London Judge), Firoz Khan Noon ( Later he will become PM of Pakistan ). While Gandhi was a Fakir to him, M A Jinnah was a close friend of Churchill. He despised Hindu leader and agreed with Waris Ali that if British leaves India and if Indian Muslims are left in the hand of majority Hindu rulers, Muslims will be discriminated and meted with riots only. [2]
Waris Ali used his connections in India to keep Churchill informed of Muslim opinion on the ground in India, and continually sent Churchill information which Churchill would then use in the House of Commons as evidence of the necessity of British rule. For Instance, on 12 April 1931, Waris Ali wrote to Churchill regarding the Cawnpore Massacre saying that the Cawnpore riots were a “well thought-out […] programme for […] the terrorisation of the Muslim minority into submission and surrender of their demand for effective safeguards in the future constitution of India”. Within a month Churchill addressed an audience in Kent thus: “Look at what happened at Cawnpore […] A hideous primordial massacre has been perpetrated by the Hindus on the Moslems because the Moslems refused to join in the glorification of the murder of a British policeman.” [2]
In short, he opposed freedom of India on the ground that if Britishers leave, India will be a bloodshed because Hindus and Muslims will fight endlessly. According to him, if power is transferred to Congress, which he deemed as Hindu organization will do no justice to Indian Muslims. It is clear he was the voice of Jinnah in the House of Commons. No wonder when he become the PM of Britain, he did everything to ensure Jinnah and his two nation theories succeed because he believed in discrimination of Muslims at the hand of Hindus.
[3]
Now, I will switch back to dialogue between FDR and Churchill.
US was hotbed of Indian freedom struggle since the foundation of Gadar party by Sohan Singh and Kesar Singh in 1912. Although US authority cracked down the party by 1921 for its fierce anarchism, India league of America was established in 1930 in New York by JJ Singh. India league successfully rallied the mainstream Americans to favor freedom of India and was able to include celebrity like Albert Einstein as one of its sympathizers among many luminaries. American newspapers were publishing articles by Neheru and it was well known to secretary of States, biggest political issue to address in Asia - freedom of India.
Therefore when Churchill rushed to FDR for help in 1940, FDR promptly pushed the issue of independence of India as one of the key topic in Atlantic chapter which was signed between them on 14th August, 1941. Article 3 of the charter guarantees the self-governance of all the races and nations. However when FDR asked when Churchill should declare a road-map for independence of India, Churchill replied, it will be after winning the war. However on Sept 9th, in house of Commons Churchill clarified article 9 is applicable only to European nations under German occupation!!
FDR was mad at Churchill because that was never discussed and neither FDR was intended on that direction. But FDR remained silent as British ambassador to US, assured him that Mr President shouldn't raise any opposition publicly. When Churchill will be visiting in Dec, independence of India will be discussed. FDR was so angry, in Dec he told Churchill point blank that charter is a joke if Britain fails to declare independence of India. This time Churchill too got angry and told FDR India is the centerpiece of British empire and without it, there will be no empire! Further he mentioned not to stir the pot during the war!
Turn of the events in 1942 in pacific theater, when Japan was sweeping Korea, China, Hongkong, Indochina, Vietnam, Philippines made FDR nervous about India. Several American intelligence agencies were pressuring Roosevelt for assuring independence of India. Reason was multiple. First, war resource of India was extremely important to fight in the pacific against Japan. Secondly Japan already declared they would favor independence of India and they would march to liberate India from British rule. That had already created a pro-Japan politics in India. Thirdly Americans needed help from nationalistic leaders of Vietnam, Korea etc. For example, American were fighting against Japanese alongside with Vietkong & Ho Chi Min ( yes same Ho Chi Min against which they would fight in Vietnam war ). And there was a trust issue. To bring the trust among the nationalist leaders of Asia who were fighting against Japan, America needs to be shown as liberator of India. This time FDR increased the gas pedal on Churchill via two ways-through US ambassador in Britain and US mission in India. He sent his best negotiator to Viceroy Lincelithgo. First Colonel Johnson and then William Philip. Under American pressure, British war cabinet sent Stafford Cripps to discuss independence of India-which we all know as Cripps mission. However Churchill wrote to FDR that Indian independence will make it far worse since after Independence India will sink into Hindu-Muslim riots.
FDR was directly coordinating with Colonel Johnson in Delhi to make sure Cripps mission succeed in granting independence of India. Colonel Johnson knew stake was high and he immediately befriended Neheru and Patel. He was also successful to bring a fruitful negotiation between Congress and Cripps.
Churchill was angry and immediately called back Cripps. He thought Cripps must be knowing from the get go, he is leading a "for-show" mission to assuage FDR and American ally. He was not supposed to be successful !!
This backstabbing by Churchill is the worst thing that happened to India. Because if he would have accepted the proposal, India would emerge as united sovereign nation. There was no partition plan in the proposal.
Obviously Colonel Johnson was angry and wrote back to FDR about backstabbing of Churchill and his betrayal to both America and India. This time FDR didn't take a tough stance even fully understanding Churchill played a game with him. This was because by then US won battle of Midway destroying all the Japanese Carriers. After the battle of Midway, Japan was on defensive and US was bombing Japan without any impunity. US needed no help then to push Japan to its shell. Therefore importance of India and thus its independence received much lower priority after it was certain that Japan would be loosing. Although even after this FDR sent William Phillip to Churchill to discuss independence of India. But Churchill was angry and he did blackmail FDR emotionally stating this was not expected of a friend!
(4)
If Churchill wouldn't be losing the election in 1946, India stood no chance of Independence in 1947. India would have seen probably more massacre and civil war. This was clear if we look at what Churchill did in his second term from 1951. He was also responsible for massacre of freedom fighters in Kenya during his second tenure. He believed in the glory of empire and imperialism.
It is difficult to imagine how such a nasty anti-Indian become the best Briton of all the time.
All I know, Indians must award him as nastiest Briton of all the time for what he has done to India.
**************************
(1)
While celebrating the birth of India, it is difficult to forget the delivery pain-partition of India which resulted in death of two millions. Twenty million people were purged from their aboriginal villages and towns where their forefathers lived for centuries.
Ever since, I started exploring the history of partition and deep communal divide between Hindus and Muslims, I always ended up in three possible hypothesis.
A: You meet a liberal- he will deeply anguish how British divided India by carefully crafting the feud between the two communities which lived peacefully side by side for centuries. In liberal viewpoint, it was an imperialist design to debilitate formal colonies by keeping the communal conflict alive.
B: You meet a Hindu Nationalist- he will ask you this question- can any community live in peace with the Muslims? Is there a historical precedence for peaceful coexisting of Muslims with other religious groups ? Can Muslims live among themselves peacefully ? He will surely blame the non-inclusive and tribal nature of Islam as a religion.
C: You meet an Islamist-he will raise this question- did Hindus ever embrace them as equal brother? Isn't it true in many of the Hindu households, they won't allow Muslims to enter into their house? When discrimination and hatred against Muslims is so high in a Hindu majority land, what is the solution for dignity and social progress for the Muslims if they are not given a separate nation ?
When I prowl through all of these narratives, I could clearly see iota of truth and merit in all of the arguments.
However, some truths are bigger than others. Although you may be convinced about the British political design of partition, it is difficult to substantiate their role behind the curtain in insinuating the riots following direct action day. I never got this question " factually" answered how and why British planned this partition -as on surface it may look like Muslim league's demand led to the gruesome butchery of India.
However while exploring role of Franklin D Roosevelt (FDR) in pressurizing Winston Churchill for independence of India, I came across several interesting documents which proves beyond any doubt-real Lucifer behind the partition is none other than Churchill [1]. This racist pig for whom 2.1 million Bengali died in the famine of 1943 is also the mastermind behind " Making of Jinnah" which led to death of two millions Indians and rape in unimaginable scale.
And imagine this- in 2002 poll, he has been voted out to be the greatest Briton of all the time. He also won Nobel Prize in literature in 1953 and an honorary citizen of United States in 1963 ( only eight people have been given this honor).
(2)
Before discussing the dialogues between FDR and Churchill which is perhaps the best documents available regarding Churchill's view on India and Hindu, it will be worthwhile to grasp a few aspect of Churchill's personality to understand how he pushed for the partition and why he was sympathetic to Indian Muslims and their demand for separate nation.
Winston Churchill started his career as an army officer in British India Army in 1896. He was involved in action in Anglo-Sudan war and 2nd Boer war in Africa. During first world war, he served in various capacity and in various fronts while failing in all of his assignments. Yet every time he escaped criticism back home using his powerful rhetoric and fiery speech for which he was famous as politician.
During his close association with British India army, he had close relationship with Muslims and Sikhs but for some reasons, he hated native Hindu rulers and Congress. He was quite open that he hates India and Hindu customs are bestial. On the contrary he had better opinion about Ottoman empire and its aristocracy. For him Arabs & Turks are brave while Hindu rulers are worthless coward. During his posting in Middle East, he loved to dress like rich Arab royals but perhaps he never liked Indian royal customs.
In London, his close circle included prominent Muslims - Aga Khan, Baron Headly ( President of London Muslim Society ), Waris Ali ( A London Judge), Firoz Khan Noon ( Later he will become PM of Pakistan ). While Gandhi was a Fakir to him, M A Jinnah was a close friend of Churchill. He despised Hindu leader and agreed with Waris Ali that if British leaves India and if Indian Muslims are left in the hand of majority Hindu rulers, Muslims will be discriminated and meted with riots only. [2]
Waris Ali used his connections in India to keep Churchill informed of Muslim opinion on the ground in India, and continually sent Churchill information which Churchill would then use in the House of Commons as evidence of the necessity of British rule. For Instance, on 12 April 1931, Waris Ali wrote to Churchill regarding the Cawnpore Massacre saying that the Cawnpore riots were a “well thought-out […] programme for […] the terrorisation of the Muslim minority into submission and surrender of their demand for effective safeguards in the future constitution of India”. Within a month Churchill addressed an audience in Kent thus: “Look at what happened at Cawnpore […] A hideous primordial massacre has been perpetrated by the Hindus on the Moslems because the Moslems refused to join in the glorification of the murder of a British policeman.” [2]
In short, he opposed freedom of India on the ground that if Britishers leave, India will be a bloodshed because Hindus and Muslims will fight endlessly. According to him, if power is transferred to Congress, which he deemed as Hindu organization will do no justice to Indian Muslims. It is clear he was the voice of Jinnah in the House of Commons. No wonder when he become the PM of Britain, he did everything to ensure Jinnah and his two nation theories succeed because he believed in discrimination of Muslims at the hand of Hindus.
[3]
Now, I will switch back to dialogue between FDR and Churchill.
US was hotbed of Indian freedom struggle since the foundation of Gadar party by Sohan Singh and Kesar Singh in 1912. Although US authority cracked down the party by 1921 for its fierce anarchism, India league of America was established in 1930 in New York by JJ Singh. India league successfully rallied the mainstream Americans to favor freedom of India and was able to include celebrity like Albert Einstein as one of its sympathizers among many luminaries. American newspapers were publishing articles by Neheru and it was well known to secretary of States, biggest political issue to address in Asia - freedom of India.
Therefore when Churchill rushed to FDR for help in 1940, FDR promptly pushed the issue of independence of India as one of the key topic in Atlantic chapter which was signed between them on 14th August, 1941. Article 3 of the charter guarantees the self-governance of all the races and nations. However when FDR asked when Churchill should declare a road-map for independence of India, Churchill replied, it will be after winning the war. However on Sept 9th, in house of Commons Churchill clarified article 9 is applicable only to European nations under German occupation!!
FDR was mad at Churchill because that was never discussed and neither FDR was intended on that direction. But FDR remained silent as British ambassador to US, assured him that Mr President shouldn't raise any opposition publicly. When Churchill will be visiting in Dec, independence of India will be discussed. FDR was so angry, in Dec he told Churchill point blank that charter is a joke if Britain fails to declare independence of India. This time Churchill too got angry and told FDR India is the centerpiece of British empire and without it, there will be no empire! Further he mentioned not to stir the pot during the war!
Turn of the events in 1942 in pacific theater, when Japan was sweeping Korea, China, Hongkong, Indochina, Vietnam, Philippines made FDR nervous about India. Several American intelligence agencies were pressuring Roosevelt for assuring independence of India. Reason was multiple. First, war resource of India was extremely important to fight in the pacific against Japan. Secondly Japan already declared they would favor independence of India and they would march to liberate India from British rule. That had already created a pro-Japan politics in India. Thirdly Americans needed help from nationalistic leaders of Vietnam, Korea etc. For example, American were fighting against Japanese alongside with Vietkong & Ho Chi Min ( yes same Ho Chi Min against which they would fight in Vietnam war ). And there was a trust issue. To bring the trust among the nationalist leaders of Asia who were fighting against Japan, America needs to be shown as liberator of India. This time FDR increased the gas pedal on Churchill via two ways-through US ambassador in Britain and US mission in India. He sent his best negotiator to Viceroy Lincelithgo. First Colonel Johnson and then William Philip. Under American pressure, British war cabinet sent Stafford Cripps to discuss independence of India-which we all know as Cripps mission. However Churchill wrote to FDR that Indian independence will make it far worse since after Independence India will sink into Hindu-Muslim riots.
FDR was directly coordinating with Colonel Johnson in Delhi to make sure Cripps mission succeed in granting independence of India. Colonel Johnson knew stake was high and he immediately befriended Neheru and Patel. He was also successful to bring a fruitful negotiation between Congress and Cripps.
Churchill was angry and immediately called back Cripps. He thought Cripps must be knowing from the get go, he is leading a "for-show" mission to assuage FDR and American ally. He was not supposed to be successful !!
This backstabbing by Churchill is the worst thing that happened to India. Because if he would have accepted the proposal, India would emerge as united sovereign nation. There was no partition plan in the proposal.
Obviously Colonel Johnson was angry and wrote back to FDR about backstabbing of Churchill and his betrayal to both America and India. This time FDR didn't take a tough stance even fully understanding Churchill played a game with him. This was because by then US won battle of Midway destroying all the Japanese Carriers. After the battle of Midway, Japan was on defensive and US was bombing Japan without any impunity. US needed no help then to push Japan to its shell. Therefore importance of India and thus its independence received much lower priority after it was certain that Japan would be loosing. Although even after this FDR sent William Phillip to Churchill to discuss independence of India. But Churchill was angry and he did blackmail FDR emotionally stating this was not expected of a friend!
(4)
If Churchill wouldn't be losing the election in 1946, India stood no chance of Independence in 1947. India would have seen probably more massacre and civil war. This was clear if we look at what Churchill did in his second term from 1951. He was also responsible for massacre of freedom fighters in Kenya during his second tenure. He believed in the glory of empire and imperialism.
It is difficult to imagine how such a nasty anti-Indian become the best Briton of all the time.
All I know, Indians must award him as nastiest Briton of all the time for what he has done to India.
No comments:
Post a Comment